On the Afel Stem in Western Neo-Aramaic
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Cambridge Semitic Languages and Cultures Studies in the Grammar and Lexicon Noorlander (eds) Khan and of Neo-Aramaic Studies in the Grammar and Geoffrey Khan and Paul M. Noorlander (eds) Lexicon of Neo-Aramaic EDITED BY GEOFFREY KHAN AND PAUL M. NOORLANDER The Neo-Aramaic dialects are modern vernacular forms of Aramaic, which has a documented history in the Middle East of over 3,000 years. Due to upheavals in the Middle East over the last one hundred years, thousands of speakers of Neo-Aramaic dialects have been forced to migrate from their homes or have perished in massacres. As a result, the dialects are now highly endangered. The dialects exhibit a remarkable diversity of structures. Moreover, the considerable depth of attestation of Aramaic from earlier periods provides evidence for the pathways of change. For these reasons the research of Neo-Aramaic is of importance for more general fields of linguistics, in particular language typology and historical linguistics. The papers in this volume represent the full range of Studies of Neo-Aramaic research that is currently being carried out on Neo-Aramaic dialects. They advance the field in numerous ways. In order to allow linguists who are not specialists in Neo-Aramaic to benefit from the papers, the examples are fully glossed. As with all Open Book publications, this entire book is available to read for free on the publisher’s website. Printed and digital editions, together with supplementary digital material, can also be found here: www.openbookpublishers.com Cover image: Women in the village of Harbole, south-eastern Turkey (photograph taken by Brunot Poizat in 1978 before the village’s destruction). Cover design: Anna Gatti book 5 ebooke and OA editions also available OBP https://www.openbookpublishers.com © 2021 Geoffrey Khan and Paul M. Noorlander. Copyright of individual chapters is maintained by the chapters’ authors. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license (CC BY 4.0). This license allows you to share, copy, distribute and transmit the text; to adapt the text and to make commercial use of the text providing attribution is made to the authors (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work). Attribution should include the following information: Geoffrey Khan and Paul M. Noorlander (eds.), Studies in the Grammar and Lexicon of Neo- Aramaic. Cambridge, UK: Open Book Publishers, 2021, https://doi.org/10.11647/OBP.0209 In order to access detailed and updated information on the license, please visit, https:// doi.org/10.11647/OBP.0209#copyright Further details about CC BY licenses are available at, https://creativecommons.org/ licenses/by/4.0/ All external links were active at the time of publication unless otherwise stated and have been archived via the Internet Archive Wayback Machine at https://archive.org/web Updated digital material and resources associated with this volume are available at https://doi.org/10.11647/OBP.0209#resources Every effort has been made to identify and contact copyright holders and any omission or error will be corrected if notification is made to the publisher. ISBN Paperback: 978-1-78374-947-8 ISBN Hardback: 978-1-78374-948-5 Semitic Languages and Cultures 5. ISBN Digital (PDF): 978-1-78374-949-2 ISSN (print): 2632-6906 ISBN Digital ebook (epub): 978-1-78374-950-8 ISSN (digital): 2632-6914 ISBN Digital ebook (mobi): 978-1-78374-951-5 ISBN Digital (XML): 978-1-78374-952-2 DOI: 10.11647/OBP.0209 Cover image: Women in the village of Harbole, south-eastern Turkey (photograph taken by Brunot Poizat in 1978 before the village’s destruction). Cover design: Anna Gatti ON THE AFEL STEM IN WESTERN NEO-ARAMAIC Steven E. Fassberg 1. Introduction The historical reconstruction of Aramaic from its earliest attestations to the modern-day dialects can, at times, be difficult. For example, how far back was the dialectal split between the eastern and western branches of Aramaic?1 The reconstruction at other times, however, can be relatively straightforward. For instance, a basically linear development is discernible in the Aramaic of Syria-Palestine. One begins with the Middle Aramaic attested in the Dead Sea Scrolls, moves on to the Late Aramaic corpora of Jewish Palestinian, Christian Palestinian and Samaritan Aramaic, and concludes with Western Neo-Aramaic�2 The study of Western Neo-Aramaic began in 1863 with the publication by Jules Ferrette (1863) of transcriptions of a text and vocabulary items from Maʿlula� Since then, the dialect of Maʿlula has been fortunate that outstanding Semitists have turned their attention to it. The greatest of Semitists, Theodor Nöldeke, commented on Ferrette’s material already in 1867, and contributed more insights in an article from 1917–1918 1 The split is fully evident in Late Aramaic (as delineated in Joseph A� Fitzmyer’s 1979 classification of the Aramaic periods), but there are indications of a dialectal divide already in Old Aramaic inscriptions� See Greenfield (1968, 1978); and most recently Fales and Grassi (2016). Margaretha Folmer (1995) has shown dialectal differences in the Official Aramaic corpus, which preceded Late Aramaic. 2 Abraham Tal (1979, 1980, 1983) has demonstrated this in a series of articles dealing with different Western Aramaic grammatical phenomena. © Steven E. Fassberg, CC BY 4�0 https://doi.org/10.11647/OBP�0209�08 288 Studies in the Grammar and Lexicon of Neo-Aramaic following Gotthelf Bergsträsser’s publication of the texts (1915) collected by Eugen Prym and Albert Socin. Many scholars have investigated Western Neo-Aramaic, but three in particular have shaped the field: Bergsträsser with the publication of texts (1915; 1919–1920), a glossary (1921), and a short grammatical description (1928, 80–9), Anton Spitaler with a grammar (1938) and texts (1957), and especially Werner Arnold with an unparalleled wealth of oral texts (1989; 19901; 19911; 19912) as well as a synchronic grammar (19902), which includes not only Maʿlula, but also the two other Western Neo-Aramaic dialects spoken in the nearby villages of Baxʿa and Jubbʿadin� Moreover, Arnold has recently published a comprehensive dictionary of the three villages (2019). To date the comparative notes in Spitaler’s grammar remain the fullest historical treatment of Maʿlula. Since the publication of that grammar, however, thanks to the intensive investigation into the literary dialects of Late Western Aramaic and the rich material from Maʿlula, Baxʿa, and Jubbʿadin that Arnold has presented, scholars now have the wherewithal to investigate further the links between older Western Aramaic and Western Neo-Aramaic� A detailed diachronic description of the development of Western Late Aramaic into Western Neo-Aramaic remains a desideratum. 2. Afel In general, the verbal system of Western Neo-Aramaic has diverged less from earlier Aramaic than have the verbal systems of other varieties of Neo-Aramaic� The morphosyntax of Maʿlula, Baxʿa, and Jubbʿadin is, on the whole, easily derived from older Western Neo-Aramaic forms,3 though it shares innovations paralleled in other non-Western varieties of Neo-Aramaic, for 3 Yet, there are some noteworthy changes from older Aramaic that are attested in Western Neo-Aramaic, e.g., the prefixing of pronominal morphemes to the old active participle and the penetration of the qattīl nominal pattern into the verbal system. On the Afel Stem in Western Neo-Aramaic 289 example, the tendency of native Aramaic reflexive-passive t-stems to disappear, leaving behind only lexical traces. I wish to focus on one phenomenon of the verbal system that Spitaler noted in his grammar (1938, §120c) but did not attempt to explain: the presence in Maʿlula of Afel verbs that in older Aramaic are inflected in Peal, and in Arabic in the 1st form. Spitaler collected a number of such verbs, some of which are frequent in the language. He cited four Aramaic roots: nḏr ‘praise’, rhṭ ‘run’ xwy ‘burn’, ykl (ʾaukel) ‘overpower’. The list of borrowings from Arabic is significantly longer: ʿṣy ‘be stubborn’, ʿzm ‘invite’, bdw ‘begin’, dʿw ‘curse’, ḍll ‘remain’, dwy ‘echo’, ḍžž ‘rumble, roar’, fzz ‘jump up’, ġḍb ‘be angry’, ġrq ‘fall asleep’, ġyb ‘be absent’, hwn ‘be light’, ḥky ‘speak’, ḥll ‘settle’, ḥqq ‘be right’, ḥrf ‘answer’, ḥss ‘notice’, ksb ‘earn’, ndm ‘regret’, nṭṭ ‘leap, spring up’, qdr ‘be able’, ṣʿd ‘rise, ascend’, ṣbr ‘wait’, ṣḥw ‘guard against’, tʿb ‘become tired’, tmm ‘remain’, wṣf ‘prescribe’, xṣṣ ‘concern, affect’,zʿl ‘be angry’, ẓhr ‘show oneself’� Spitaler commented that most of the verbs are intransitive. I think this fact is significant, as I shall try to show below. Spitaler (1938, §121) wrote of the tendency in Maʿlula for weak verbs to shift from one verbal category to another. This phenomenon is also true for earlier periods of Aramaic. Spitaler mentioned I-ʾ verbs influencing medial II-w/y verbs, and geminates influencing I-n. Of relevance to the discussion is the Afel-looking participle mōmar ‘saying’ from the root ʾmr, whose creation Spitaler (1938, §121, §162b) attributed to a similarity with the II-w/y Afel verbal forms and an imperfect analogy of the type ōqem (Afel ‘he raised’) : mōqem (Afel ‘he raises’) :: ʾōmar (Peal ‘he says’) : X X = mōmar�4 Another germane example given by Spitaler (1938, §171b) is the Afel verb appi ‘he gave’, which is commonly derived from the 4 The vowel a is a reflex of the older Aramaic rule *i > a /__ guttural. 290 Studies in the Grammar and Lexicon of Neo-Aramaic root yhb ‘gave’ (Bergsträsser, 1928, 84). According to Bergsträsser, a shift such as 3fs *yahbat > *yabbat led to an analogy of the type xassat (‘she covered’; III-y root) : appat (‘she gave’) :: xassi (‘he covered’) : X X= appi�5 In his brief discussion, Spitaler did not include as examples of the shift from Peal to Afel the preterite Peal II-w/y áqam ‘he arose’ and ámet ‘he died’, but I believe that the initial vowels in these forms show an incipient move to Afel, like mōmar and appi mentioned above, and thus are relevant to the discussion at hand.